1992 Thunderbird LX March 15, 2011, 03:59:51 PM I've been away from the forums for a bit. I've been working on the 92 LX. Like ScottD's 97LX I imagine that I've got the only 92LX on the Fox Tbird/Cougar Forums. I've pretty much given up on the 86 Bird. I'm not motivated to get it on the road any time soon. But, the 92 now has grown on me a bit. All the goodies work including the temp controlled HVAC. What a great feature. Plus the engine only has 22,000 miles so it's smooth and satisfies the state of California just fine. Emissions measuring in the mid single digits. I've had to do some repairs however, after my wife's 12 years driving the car. It leaked fuel when the tank was full so it went 2 years only filling to 3/4 of a tank. I replaced the fuel pump and sender. All fixed. I had to completely rebuild the front suspension. Every component was worn out. But, I didn't replace the tires in time. The right rear gave up the tread at 55 mph so the rear inner fender plastic is long gone. It also bit a chunk out of the rear bumper by the wheel well but it really doesn't show too bad. It did however, give me an excuse to repaint the wheels.Compared to the 86 this 3.8 has power. The EFI is a wonderful thing compared to the old CFI. This car will smoke the tires.So, I'm thinking if we get enough MN-12's here then we'll have to expand to include them. I think we are up to three or four now. Besides this site is much more fun and friendly that the MN-12 (not mentioning names) site I've been frequenting lately. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #1 – March 15, 2011, 04:35:57 PM Sounds like a nice car. As far as including them officially as part of this forum, I'll have to say whole heartedly, NO. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #2 – March 15, 2011, 04:57:57 PM Quote from: vinnietbird;355455Sounds like a nice car. As far as including them officially as part of this forum, I'll have to say whole heartedly, NO.I knew that would be the answer. But, you will still have to hear about it once in a while. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #3 – March 15, 2011, 10:58:11 PM Quote from: vinnietbird;355455Sounds like a nice car. As far as including them officially as part of this forum, I'll have to say whole heartedly, NO. +1I had an MN-12. I still have the Fox. There's a reason for that..... Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #4 – March 16, 2011, 09:12:12 PM Mn-12's are pretty comfortable daily drivers. I liked my '94 LX, the 4.6/4r70w made it even better. Only thing I dislike about them is the way they look, they're pretty bland out of the box. Have any near future plans for yours? Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #5 – March 16, 2011, 10:56:53 PM Quote from: 20thanniver-ls;355587Mn-12's are pretty comfortable daily drivers. I liked my '94 LX, the 4.6/4r70w made it even better. Only thing I dislike about them is the way they look, they're pretty bland out of the box. I don't get it!?! I love the way the MN12's look. I love them as much as I love Foxes. I don't know why everyone thinks they look boring or ugly. The overall design is basically the same. IMO at least....Anyway, no you're not alone. I've got a 96 3.8 'bird too. I like it, but I do like my cougar better lol. I'll have it for a few more days at least. I second the motion for not expanding the forums too. While its nice to be able to include my DD bird in the User Rides section, I just don't agree with all of us posting up technical questions about them on here. That's what the (I'm guessing...) aforementioned TCCOA forums are for;) Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #6 – March 16, 2011, 11:12:19 PM I dig all Thunderbirds ...not just the MN-12's, not just the Foxes, but all of 'em ...even the big birds. The MN-12 just helped me appreciate the rest of the generations a little bit more.What else have you got planned for the '92? Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #7 – March 17, 2011, 08:28:37 AM The only Cougars I haven't really liked is the later Mazda based FWD ones. But they do have a following. I can't think of a Tbird I don't like. I think the 67-69 four door ones are pretty stylish. The monster Lincoln MK like Tbirds are even interesting. Too big for my garage though. We do need to jump up and down and scream and yell for someone to make the window track rubber for the 83-88s. That's the one thing keeping me from restoring the 86. And those lousy arm rests that keep falling off. Darn that bugs me.Ford needs to correct this immediatly...Tbird, Tbird, Tbird.... Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #8 – March 17, 2011, 05:46:59 PM ok,then i will be the only 96 XR7 on the forum. i drove the 88 about 80 miles last year. the 96had 23,400 on when i got it last may. it now has over 25000. it has more room, handles better,and gets better mileage for this old fat person. it also looks like a day2 car fom top to bottomand in the motor compartment. it is the last cougar i will ever own. looks like the 88 might havea new owner in maryland next week. keeping my fingers crossed.--irvoh, i forgot, the 96 is faster too Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #9 – March 17, 2011, 06:18:34 PM Quote from: irv;355643ok,then i will be the only 96 XR7 on the forum. i drove the 88 about 80 miles last year. the 96had 23,400 on when i got it last may. it now has over 25000. it has more room, handles better,and gets better mileage for this old fat person. it also looks like a day2 car fom top to bottomand in the motor compartment. it is the last cougar i will ever own. looks like the 88 might havea new owner in maryland next week. keeping my fingers crossed.--irvoh, i forgot, the 96 is faster tooIt would probably be dumb to disagree with this, as this is common sense. When a model is dated, it gets replaced. It's the circle of life. However, the benefit of our cars is the potential. I'd also consider the styling a benefit over the MN12, but that's my own opinion. You can upgrade your fox to outperform every single aspect of your MN-12, and can make a supercar out of the foxes. Not to say that you can't make an awesome car out of the MN12 (I've seen some AWESOME MN12's), but I think it's probably easier to do it with the foxes, as there is much greater aftermarket support for the Fox chassis. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #10 – March 17, 2011, 06:37:42 PM Quote from: RunninWild;355644It would probably be dumb to disagree with this, as this is common sense. When a model is dated, it gets replaced. It's the circle of life. However, the benefit of our cars is the potential. I'd also consider the styling a benefit over the MN12, but that's my own opinion. You can upgrade your fox to outperform every single aspect of your MN-12, and can make a supercar out of the foxes. Not to say that you can't make an awesome car out of the MN12 (I've seen some AWESOME MN12's), but I think it's probably easier to do it with the foxes, as there is much greater aftermarket support for the Fox chassis.To name just one....Vinnie's. I like the foxes. I just currently have the 92 on the road. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #11 – March 17, 2011, 06:40:17 PM Quote from: irv;355643 the 96 had 23,400 on when i got it last may. it now has over 25000. Wow. I wish that was all the miles I drove. I've put over 12,000 miles on my 96 since I got it in August. 186,300 to 198,8xx as of today. Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #12 – March 18, 2011, 01:58:37 AM I almost forgot I had an account here lolSpeaking as a biased MN12 owner and TCCoA moderator I think there's valid pluses and minuses to both generations, the interior fit and finish for example always seemed better thought out in the Fox, especially things like switches and instruments. Those just always seemed out of place in the 89-93 interiors. However, I do find the exterior of the MN12 cars to be more sleek and proportional, in comparison the Fox can seem very upright and the larger overhangs can look awkward at certain angles. In terms of performance, it's true the MN12 doesn't have even a fraction of the aftermarket the Fox chassis has, but it does benefit from being very well set up from the factory. Springs, bars, shocks and a select few poly or delrin bushings will make for significantly improved handling without sacrificing too much ride. To get the same kind of result out of the Fox chassis it requires replacing virtually the entire front end and changing the layout of the rear. The Fox does have the 2-300lb weight advantage as well as a shorter wheelbase going for it though.The way I see it we're a minority of automotive enthusiasts. If Being based off the Fox platform was the only deciding factor in choosing a Fox based T-bird or Cougar you may as well just bite the bullet and buy the Mustang. These cars weren't what they were because of their underpinnings, it was that they represented the best of technology, sophistication, and style for both nameplates at their respective times. These are very overlooked and under-appreciated cars by the majority regardless of the platform, and us valuing one generation over the other certainly isn't helping the fact. Personally If I had to find a replacement for my '94, my scope expands from 1983 to 1997. I know I can get any of which up to my standards.-Matt Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #13 – March 18, 2011, 02:23:49 PM Quote from: XR7-4.6;355698I almost forgot I had an account here lolSpeaking as a biased MN12 owner and TCCoA moderator I think there's valid pluses and minuses to both generations, the interior fit and finish for example always seemed better thought out in the Fox, especially things like switches and instruments. Those just always seemed out of place in the 89-93 interiors. However, I do find the exterior of the MN12 cars to be more sleek and proportional, in comparison the Fox can seem very upright and the larger overhangs can look awkward at certain angles. In terms of performance, it's true the MN12 doesn't have even a fraction of the aftermarket the Fox chassis has, but it does benefit from being very well set up from the factory. Springs, bars, shocks and a select few poly or delrin bushings will make for significantly improved handling without sacrificing too much ride. To get the same kind of result out of the Fox chassis it requires replacing virtually the entire front end and changing the layout of the rear. The Fox does have the 2-300lb weight advantage as well as a shorter wheelbase going for it though.The way I see it we're a minority of automotive enthusiasts. If Being based off the Fox platform was the only deciding factor in choosing a Fox based T-bird or Cougar you may as well just bite the bullet and buy the Mustang. These cars weren't what they were because of their underpinnings, it was that they represented the best of technology, sophistication, and style for both nameplates at their respective times. These are very overlooked and under-appreciated cars by the majority regardless of the platform, and us valuing one generation over the other certainly isn't helping the fact. Personally If I had to find a replacement for my '94, my scope expands from 1983 to 1997. I know I can get any of which up to my standards.-Matt I respect your opinion and I agree with the fact that a stock MN12 (excluding the SC) definitely will outperform a typical 83-88 bird, save for the '88 TC. However the reason this forum exists is because we don't want to drive Mustangs. Tbirds and Cougars are much rarer to find, even more so in good shape, and they can do about anything you can upgrade a fox stang to do.I almost bought a '96 4.6 XR7 instead of my current DD (Exploder), and I really wish I had bought it. This is basically what it looked like: Quote Selected
1992 Thunderbird LX Reply #14 – March 18, 2011, 03:33:40 PM gee what other forum have i seen this car on[wink, wink].even though i have the 96 now ,i much prefer the 94-5front end better. the 967 looks like someone punched it in thegrille.but from the drivers seat i cant see it. i couldnt find amint 94 or 5 to buy. wife also said i was done buying cars.i used a 25th anniv. reflector and t/lamps to get rid of thechrome and emblems in the back. pic was before i got myill platesQuote from: XR7-4.6;355698I almost forgot I had an account here lolSpeaking as a biased MN12 owner and TCCoA moderator I think there's valid pluses and minuses to both generations, the interior fit and finish for example always seemed better thought out in the Fox, especially things like switches and instruments. Those just always seemed out of place in the 89-93 interiors. However, I do find the exterior of the MN12 cars to be more sleek and proportional, in comparison the Fox can seem very upright and the larger overhangs can look awkward at certain angles. In terms of performance, it's true the MN12 doesn't have even a fraction of the aftermarket the Fox chassis has, but it does benefit from being very well set up from the factory. Springs, bars, shocks and a select few poly or delrin bushings will make for significantly improved handling without sacrificing too much ride. To get the same kind of result out of the Fox chassis it requires replacing virtually the entire front end and changing the layout of the rear. The Fox does have the 2-300lb weight advantage as well as a shorter wheelbase going for it though.The way I see it we're a minority of automotive enthusiasts. If Being based off the Fox platform was the only deciding factor in choosing a Fox based T-bird or Cougar you may as well just bite the bullet and buy the Mustang. These cars weren't what they were because of their underpinnings, it was that they represented the best of technology, sophistication, and style for both nameplates at their respective times. These are very overlooked and under-appreciated cars by the majority regardless of the platform, and us valuing one generation over the other certainly isn't helping the fact. Personally If I had to find a replacement for my '94, my scope expands from 1983 to 1997. I know I can get any of which up to my standards.-Matt Quote Selected
Topic: 1992 Thunderbird LX (Read 4540 times)
previous topic - next topic
